04-09-2009, 04:42 AM
|
 |
Banned
Guru
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Houston, Tx.
Age: 57
Posts: 4,171
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by C6R
This story has nothing to do with cocaine. Larry Flynt claimed that he had done an investigation into an alleged abortion that one of G.W.'s girlfriends had gotten, but would neither name the woman nor publish the story as this supposed abortion patient would not confirm the story and he was afraid of a libel suit.
He uses three unnamed sources. Adding another level to an unnamed source does not add to its credibility. The writer, Hatfield, was also a convicted felon of embezzlement and hiring a hitman to kill his boss. The publisher dropped him and recalled his book. He has no credibility.
Says nothing about cocaine use. George H. W. Bush admits sending G.W. to a program.
The article title says it all I think. It's it just Bush calling Hatfield, from the aforementioned book, full of (*)(*)(*)(*).
The article has been removed, but from what I've been able to find on it in summaries, it is more of him denying the allegations.
Oh, now this is a source you NEED to read. Weisburg essentially tears apart everything about Hetfield's book, say's that Hatfield really shouldn't be trusted, and calls his allegations completely unsubstantiated.
Weinsburg goes one further and places blame also on the publisher. Calls it a "Crock" and a "rotting fish in the top drawer". Tell reader to beware of books published by Hatfield's publisher.
Again, this story is no longer on the internet, but I think the title says it all. He was found to be a convict.
This is also not on the internet...but a gossip column? Really?
Not on the internet anymore. Just a guess, but I'm thinking the story is probably about Bush's political goals and not a scoop about evidence of cocaine use.
This last story is about Gore and G.W. prior to the 2000 election. It says nothing about cocaine.
It seems that all the "evidence" about his cocaine use comes from J. H. Hatfield, a disgraced convict who had his work torn apart as a "crock" by fellow writers and was shunned by his publisher. He had no evidence to back up any of the claims he puts forward in his book...just a few "unnamed sources".
|
More right wing "spin" and propaganda. Where are the links to your sources refuting the sources I posted? Nowhere. Folks can claim anything is untrue or misconstrued.....doesn't mean that it's at all accurate, especially when an agenda is afoot.
|
Sources by themselves prove nothing. They are only valuable when backtracked to one of two conclusions...they either trace back to valid evidence or they fall apart. These fell apart. I enjoy tracking sources...it can be quite fun.
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
